I have an Invoice table in dynamodb with hash-sort combo key. The hash is a uuid "tenantId" and the sort is a uuid named "id" for the invoice. However I have a field called "InvoiceNumber" which is the human readable sequential identifier for the invoices.
What is the best/optimal way to increment the InvoiceNumber when I create a new record while ensuring uniqueness and avoid race conditions?
Edit: Uniqueness would need to be enforced for each hash or tenant but not across the table.
Take a look at this Atomic Counter example. It is exactly what you are looking for.
Related
In every cosmos db repository example I've seen, the id/row key has been generated like this: {partitionKey}:{Guid.newGuid()}. I'm working on a web api where the user won't necessarily have any way of knowing what this random GUID is. But they will know the EmployeeId, ProjectId etc. of the respective object, so I'm wondering if there are any issues with using i.e. EmployeeId as both the partition key and Id?
There's nothing technically wrong with the approach of setting id and partition key the same however you will have just one document per partition and that's bad design IMHO as all your read queries will be cross-partition queries (e.g. listing all employees).
One approach could be to set the partition key as the type of the entity (Employee, Project etc.) and then set the id as the unique identifier of the entity (employee id, project id etc.).
To be honest, if you know the partition key AND the item id, you can do a Point read which is the fastest.
We used to also take the approach of using random guids for all item IDs, but this means you will always need to know this id and partition key. Sometimes a more functional key as the item ID makes more sense so have a good thought about it!
And remember, an item ID is not unique, the uniqueness is only within the partition key.
So you could have two items with the same item ID and different partition key.
So I wanted to fetch the last item/row of my dynamodb table but i am not finding resources. My primary key is id having series of incremented numbers such as 1,2,3... for each row respectively.
This is my function.
async function readMessage(){
const params = {
TableName: table,
};
return dynamo.getItem(params).promise();
}
I am not sure as to what i should be adding in my params.
DynamoDB has two types of primary keys:
Partition key – A simple primary key, composed of one attribute known as the partition key.
Partition key and sort key – Referred to as a composite primary key, this type of key is composed of two attributes. The first attribute is the partition key, and the second attribute is the sort key.
When fetching an item by partition key, you need to specify the exact partition key. You cannot fetch the max/min partition key.
Instead, you may want to create a sort key with a timestamp (or the ID if it's a sequential number) and use the sort key to fetch the last item.
Check out the AWS docs on Choosing the Right Partition Key for more info.
The proper way to design a table in DynamoDB is based on its expected access patterns; if this is something you need perhaps you should consider using this id as Sort Key instead of Primary Key and then query the table in descending order while also limiting the amount of items to 1.
If instead you don't want to change the schema of your items and you don't care about making at least two operations to do this you have two, not optimal options:
If none of your items ever gets deleted, just make a count first and use that information to know what's the latest item that was written.
Alternatively, if you could consider keeping a "special" record in your DynamoDB table that is basically a count that gets always incremented/written when one of your "other" items gets written. Upon retrieval you first retrieve the value of this special record and use this info to retrieve the actual one.
The combination of the partition key and sort key, makes the primary key of your item in the dynamoDB, so their combination must be unique, otherwise the item will be overwritten.
In almost all my use-cases, I select the primary key as an object attribute, like the brand, an email or a class and then, for the sort key I select the TimeStamp. So in this way, you always know the partition key, we need it to retrieve the values and then you can query your dynamoDB by making some filters by the sort key. For more extensive examples using Python, check the AWS page: https://docs.aws.amazon.com/amazondynamodb/latest/developerguide/GettingStarted.Python.04.html, where it shows, how you can query your DynamoDB items.
There is also other ways to define the keys in your Dynamo and for that I advise you to check https://docs.aws.amazon.com/amazondynamodb/latest/developerguide/bp-sort-keys.html
A bit of context: I am trying to build an inventory to list my AWS resources in various accounts and I am planning to use DynamoDB to store the data. These will be the columns for my table: ResourceARN, ResourceName, ResourceType, StandardTag, IsDeleted, LastUpdateTime and ResourceCreationDate ( this field is available only for a few resource types like Ec2).
Question: I want to query my DDB table using account ID, resource type and tag name. I am stumped on choosing the primary key for the table. Since primary key should be unique and has to have 1:many relationship. Hence, I cannot use a combination of resourceType and account Id. Nor can I use resourceArn as my primary key since it is 1:1 relationship. Also, using the resourceARN as the sort key does not make sense to me. I understand that I can use a simple scan operation, but that is very costly and will take time if I add more data in my DDB.
I would appreciate any suggestions or guidance over the same.
Short answer
Partition key: Account ID
Sort key: <resource type>/<resource ID>
Rationale
It's a common pattern for a sort key to be a string concatenating multiple attributes. Since sort keys can be queried by prefix, you can leverage this in your queries:
Get all account resources: query all sort keys on the Account ID partition key
Get all EC2 instances of an account: query with partition key = <your account ID> and sort key begins_with('ec2-instance').
You may notice that ARNs follow such a hierarchy as well (what's probably not a coincidence). This would be effectively using a subset of the ARN as the sort key.
Some notes:
DynamoDB is about attributes as much as about columns. You don't need to include ResourceCreationDate in the records which don't have it, and doing so will save you space (see next point).
Attribute names count as storage for every record, which impacts cost and also throughput. It's common to use shorthand for names for this reason (rct instead of ResourceCreationTime for example).
You can use LSIs (Local Secondary Indexes) to order by creation and update times if you need this.
I have searched this on Google for a while but did not get a specific answer.
Lets say I have a table storing the people information, it uses PeopleId as the hash key. Is there a way to construct a query to return the person if his Id is 1 or 2?
Looks like I can use BatchGetItem to do such things, but will it have higher latency?
You cannot have any conditions of the Partition Key part of your Primary Key in DynamoDB. You can on the Sort Key.
So, you would either have to do GetItem twice, or use BatchGetItem.
I'm new to DynamoDB - I already have an application where the data gets inserted, but I'm getting stuck on extracting the data.
Requirement:
There must be a unique table per customer
Insert documents into the table (each doc has a unique ID and a timestamp)
Get X number of documents based on timestamp (ordered ascending)
Delete individual documents based on unique ID
So far I have created a table with composite key (S:id, N:timestamp). However when I come to query it, I realise that since my id is unique, because I can't do a wildcard search on ID I won't be able to extract a range of items...
So, how should I design my table to satisfy this scenario?
Edit: Here's what I'm thinking:
Primary index will be composite: (s:customer_id, n:timestamp) where customer ID will be the same within a table. This will enable me to extact data based on time range.
Secondary index will be hash (s: unique_doc_id) whereby I will be able to delete items using this index.
Does this sound like the correct solution? Thank you in advance.
You can satisfy the requirements like this:
Your primary key will be h:customer_id and r:unique_id. This makes sure all the elements in the table have different keys.
You will also have an attribute for timestamp and will have a Local Secondary Index on it.
You will use the LSI to do requirement 3 and batchWrite API call to do batch delete for requirement 4.
This solution doesn't require (1) - all the customers can stay in the same table (Heads up - There is a limit-before-contact-us of 256 tables per account)